linux-kernel - Re: FatELF patches...

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 02 Nov 2009 07:17:26 +0100
From:	Julien BLACHE <jb@...ache.org>
To:	"Ryan C. Gordon" <icculus@...ulus.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: FatELF patches...

"Ryan C. Gordon" <icculus@...ulus.org> wrote:

Hi,

With my Debian Developer hat on...

> Package managers are a _fantastic_ invention. They are a killer
> feature over other operating systems, including ones people pay way
> too much money to use. That being said, there are lots of places where
> using a package manager doesn't make sense:

> experimental software that might have an audience but isn't ready for
> wide adoption

That usually ships as sources or prebuilt binaries in a tarball - target
/opt and voila! For a bigger audience you'll see a lot of experimental
stuff that gets packaged (even in quick'n'dirty mode).

> software that isn't appropriate for an apt/yum repository

Just create a repository for the damn thing if you want to distribute it
that way. There's no "appropriate / not appropriate" that applies here.

> software that distros refuse to package but is still perfectly useful

Look at what happens today. A lot of that gets packaged by third
parties, and more often than not they involve distribution
maintainers. (See debian-multimedia, PLF for Mandriva, ...)

> closed-source software

Why do we even care? Besides, commercial companies can just stop sitting
on their hands and start distributing real packages. It's no different
from rolling out a Windows Installer or Innosetup. It's packaging.

> and software that wants to work between distros that don't have 
> otherwise-compatible rpm/debs (or perhaps no package manager at all).

Tarball, /opt, static build.

And, about the /lib, /lib32, /lib64 situation Debian and Debian-derived
systems, the solution to that is multiarch and it's being worked
on. It's a lot better and cleaner than the fat binary kludge.

JB.

-- 
Julien BLACHE                                   <http://www.jblache.org> 
<jb@...ache.org>                                  GPG KeyID 0xF5D65169
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/